Dear Mr. Watt:
Liberty Counsel is a national public interest law firm. We have presented many briefs before the United States Supreme Court, and we have argued before the High Court and in state and federal courts throughout the nation. Liberty Counsel has offices in Florida, Virginia and hundreds of affiliate attorneys licensed in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. We frequently provide assistance to various organizations including Exodus International (“Exodus”).

It has recently come to our attention that your web site, http://justinsomnia.org, is using an image that you admit was taken from the Exodus web site. As you are aware, that image is located at

You appear to believe that the stolen image is exempt from federal intellectual property laws as a “parody” due to “fair use.” Unfortunately, the intricacies of federal law cannot adequately be covered on “Wikipedia” due to the variety of facts addressed by courts in numerous cases. Your use of the image is indeed a violation of copyright law and is not covered by “fair use.” Nearly the entire image file from the Exodus web site was is used on your web site with only two changes. You changed “Gay” to “Straight?” and “www.exodus.to” to “www.gay.com.” Furthermore, your altered image substantially diminishes the potential value of the original image as utilized by Exodus on billboards across America and online. Moreover, your infringing activity creates the false impression that Exodus is sponsoring or endorsing the altered billboard, in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125, as it contains the “E” logo mark that belongs to Exodus. You have not been licensed or authorized to use either the image or the logo belonging to Exodus.

We are confident that you will understand our insistence that you immediately cease use of the image on your web site or in any other form. Please confirm your agreement to this request, and please note your confirmation that no other use is being or will be made of the images or logo, by signing and returning an original signature on a copy of this letter at the address shown above, no later than March 15, 2006. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation with this request.

That is amazing. And you know that I’m behind you with whatever I can do. :-) I know JUST a little bit about copyright law, and they are full of it. Parody is clearly protected, and it’s clearly a parody. I’m so sending this to boingboing.

Sounds like maybe they’re unhappy. Have they gone to the web site you recommended on the billboard? It could only help.

(and you can’t even really see the logo. I didn’t notice that it was more than just a few background clouds until they brought my attention to it. and I certainly don’t associate it with Exodus. Stinkers!)

I fear this opinion might make me unpopular, but I do think it might cross a “fair use” line. Not on the basis of parody, which is absolutely protected, but rather becasue of the circumstances behind its execution

A) No matter how small or whatnot, their logo is still on the board. If you would photoshop the whole board as another color and obscure the detail, it would help the case.
B) It’s not just a snapshot of the billboard that you altered — it’s an official pic that they actually use for promotional purposes. Imagine if they were to take a pic Gay.com was using on their site and change a few words to make it “ex-gay”-friendly. We would go apeshit.

I feel dirty even slightly defending Staver and The Liberty Counsel, but I don’t want to see you lose face over this. I’d certainly be in contact with Lambda Legal and get a true expert opinion.

Jeremy:
I see your point on the logo…it wouldn’t hurt the parody at all to eliminate that. Justin, that’s a decent idea, simply from a legal standpoint. Frankly, I had never even noticed the “e” until they pointed it out, and even then I had to look for it.

As far as it being a photograph instead of the billboard…I’m not sure that matters as far as copyright law is concerned. Justin altered a photograph digitally, and that’s the real issue at hand as far as the law is concerned. Their use of it, frankly, doesn’t mean anything…it’s whether or not Justin’s use qualifies under the 4 fair use factors or is clearly a member of a protected class (criticisim, parody, or other allowed use). I think it is VERY clearly protected speech.

Jason: But my understanding is that you have to look at the whole photo as part of the parody, not just the board. If they’ve taken measures to protect this specific image, then that includes the entire photo. So when it comes to altering it enough to make it acceptable, you also have to alter or crop out much more of the surrounding environment.

Again, this is just my understanding. I had a similar situation where I set a parody in a conference room. The parody (which involved public figures) was no problem, it was the conference room pic (which I had pulled from a company’s official photos).

1. the purpose and character of your use
2. the nature of the copyrighted work
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion taken
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market.

Only one of these has anything to do with amount of use. While Justin did take the significant portion of the work, without doing such there is no possibility of parody.

Actually, now that I look at it, Justin didn’t use much of the photo. According to my math, he used 65.29209%, actually, and that doesn’t count the pixels he altered. If you take those into account, it might be very close to half. Over half, but significantly less than the whole, and just enough to produce the parody. All of the other factors (purpose, nature, and effect) are all in Justin’s favor.

Yea, and its VERY, VERY likely that he’ll be fine if he calls their bluff and does nothing. Just wanted to throw it out there that its not just the focal point of the pic that matters. And I’d DEF. alter the logo.

Mike at Ex-Gay Watch (who also got a cease-and-desist letter from Liberty Counsel) has passed my contact info along to Lambda Legal who I plan to call later.

Jane, Jeremy, and Jason, regarding Exodus’ e-in-a-circle logo/watermark, I too may have originally missed it (or overlooked it) and would not have any qualms with photoshopping it out of the image—to appease Exodus. In the meantime I’m going to let the image stand and allow things to play out as they are.

Is it harmful or helpful that in a moment of indignant outrage I stole your image and uploaded it to my MySpace page, then posted it as a comment on many of my friends’ pages, and included it in a discussion thread on one of my clubs there?

And I thought, facetiously, “Amazing! The parody worked.” Here’s someone who commits an entire blog to fighting homosexuality yet was able to experience the deeply offensive nature of the Exodus billboards from a conservative, heterosexual perspective.

Justin, you are f**king AWESOME. Good luck dealing with the legal side of this. It just goes to show ya, though, that these folks have nothing better to do with their time and money. Please keep us updated about what happens, k? :)

One, how much would it cost for you to put this billboard up in CA? I’ll kick in the first $100 if you decide to go “real-world” ;-)!

Two, you probably know this already, but CA has some fairly strong laws that cover and protect this kind of speech. CA has singled out Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) as especially odious legal (at least legal sounding) instruments. Here’s some more information on CA and SLAPPs.

Here’s a thought: If these hatemongers go so far as to file a suit against you, file a countersuit. The claim? Intentional infliction of emotional distress. Not over their suit against you specifically, but a class action on behalf of all non-straights, asserting that the ‘gays can change’ BS is a lie that harms all non-straights. Of course, part of this would involve proof as to whether the ‘ex-gay’-oids know that ‘gays can change’ is BS – meaning that, as part of discovery, they could be forced to come up with actual statistics to ‘prove’ their ‘success’ rate. Its always interesting to see how far these clowns will go to avoid having to show what their actual ‘success’ rate is.

I’m not an attorney–you need to run this past one–but as a parody, I would think the case would be thrown out by a judge. If they were serious about this, they would have gone to the judge first to shut you down. That they have to threaten you suggests to me that they are unsure they could win the case. But the question is, can you afford to fight the case?

I would love to see these evangelicals attack adultery, lying, stealing, covetousness, divorce, and child abuse with as much vehemence as they have used to attack homosexuality. Being gay didn’t even make it to the top ten (commandments) in God’s list of sins! Your billboard parody is amazing, and shows how evangelicals waste so much money on silly things while the multitudes starve. “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.” (The Bible- Book of James 1:27)

I will donate $200 right now! I assumed the billboard was real. Why isn’t the gay movement filling the country with this kind of stuff?

Plus there should be billboards touting the VP’s daughter, Mary and her lover Heather, as sexually active and unrepentant homosexuals reflecting Dick Cheney’s wholesome values (indeed he has said she is his best staff person).

There are dozens of ways in which the right wing’s own bs ideology can be totally turned against them. Why the hell haven’t we been doing this all along? Also other billboards questioning the negligent parenting of Phyllis Shchlafely, Dan Quayle, and other prominent conservatives (ie “Why have they raised and indoctrinated with their own values – active and unrepentant homosexual children *who has specifically chosen to reject ex-gay theology)!!!

I agree with BigBadJon. Where have all these people and religions been while such things as adultry, child and spousal abuse been? They seem content in judging other souls but where’s the love and compassion they’re suppose to have. Not to mention the fact they know they have no right and shouldn’t be judging another soul’s journey in this life anyway. It’s quite hypocritical and selective how some people and religions act.

I think their strongest argument is the trademark claim. At the bare minimum, I would edit out the “e” logo they’ve talked about. Your best bet is just take another billboard photo and create a similar shot. Less satisfying than using the same pic, I know, but will keep you out of trouble.

Funny, but risky. I’m no trademark attorney, but the copied “E” sure doesn’t look like a parody. If you ‘ve got the money to fight hire an attorney, you could, but why bother? I’d ditch the “E”. If your actions cause Exodus not to be able to use the bilboard again, then you may have damages if they get a friendly judge.

Will and Kyle, even though you may not have, I thought seriously (for about 15 seconds) about starting a fund to purchase a billboard. Then it occured to me that the intent of my parody was to demostrate how deeply offensive I found the message on the original billboard. So I’d rather not perpetuate that message’s delivery (beyond this parody), even in jest.

Oh and thanks for the SLAPP link. In the course of this experience it was brought to my attention (I thought I heard it called a slapsuit), but I need to dig deeper.

Blier Watch, ThomasMC, and Craig R, big thanks for the links and support! It’s important to me that as many people as possible see about his. Not so much the C&D letter (which is important) but the parody billboard—and what it parodies.

BigBadJon and Dee, hear, hear! But let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water. “Ex-gays” need support groups as much as (if not more than) everybody else. That said, I in no way support the greatly confused and misinformed mission of Exodus International.

Kat and Kyle, I totally understand your frustration (who doesn’t after 5+ Bush years) but I’d rather take the high road. Engage the opposition in dialog.

Bob, Marc, and Lwyergrl, I don’t consider a cease-and-desist letter to be dialog. If indeed the watermarked-e is their concern, then a simple email requesting that it be airbrushed out would have been well more than enough to get me to do so.

Sending a cease-and-desist letter through a conversative law firm, however, is an act of war.

Obviously (to me) they were not interested in protecting their trademark, they are interested in stifling my free speech. Which is something I’m VERY passionate about.

So for now the image will stay as is, pending appropriate legal consulation.

Has anyone passed this info along to any copyright reform advocacy groups (e.g. EFF, Public Knowledge, even Creative Commons) or engaged scholars (e.g. Siva Vaidhyanathan at NYU, Peter Jaszi at American U., Larry Lessig at Stanford, etc.)? The incident provides an excellent example of the shortcomings of fair use doctrine — that it’s not a preemptive safeguard, that one can only invoke it as a defense after having been accused of infringement, by which point the lawyers are already raking in the cash….

For folks interested in more details about the ethics and effects of forcibly converting people (esp. young people) away from homosexuality, please see Maman Poulet’s excellent and detailed post on Ex-gay movements.

I’m a supporter of Exodus, but I agree with you guys on this one. You should be fully allowed to use this as a parody. You make a good point. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. This makes it look like Exodus is afraid of free speech. I think Exodus should “let you be” on this one. It’s making mountains out of mole hills.

As an ‘ex-straight’ who saw the light, this billboard is great. There IS hope for straights! With over 50 percent of straight marriages ending in divorce and rampant wife-beating/abuse, I can see why folks would want to leave the orientation. Pooh on Liberty Councel.

Let me preface this by saying I’m not a lawyer and I have absolutely no idea what I’m talking about. However…

I think you might have a more effective and lawyer-proof parody if you smudged-out the “e” logo mark and subtly changed the billboard background color (mauve? pale salmon? washed-out rainbow tie-dye? or, dare I say it: pink?)

Uberpatriot, well, it seems to me that someone from Exodus could have just sent me an email asking me to remove (or airbrush out) their logo from my parody image. That would have been the sane, human, Christian thing to do.

Rather someone decided it would be more effective to intimidate me with a cease-and-desist letter requiring that I suspend my civil rights so that their narrow-minded worldview appears unchallenged.

In order to defend my right to free speech, the parody image will remain as is, unless a judge tells me otherwise.

Update: Ha. Yeah, pink. I think I need to come up with a rainbow version.

When blogger Justin Watt heard about Exodus International’s billboard in Orlando promoting its ex-gay ministry, Watt, who lives in Santa Rosa, Calif., says he became livid and was inspired to act. Last September a friend forwarded him a photo of the billboard, which reads, “Gay? Unhappy?” and provides the address for the Exodus Web site. He said he was so offended by the billboard that he used Photoshop to change the text of the image to “Straight? Unhappy?” and swapped the Exodus Web address for Gay.com. In about two minutes he had finished making his parody and posted it on his blog…

[…] Exodus International claims blogger Justin Watt violated copyright and trademark laws when he posted a parody of their “Gay? Unhappy? http://www.exodus.to&#8221; billboard ad campaign on his blog – an image which read “Straight? Unhappy? http://www.gay.com.&#8221; ExGayWatch.com also posted the parody in February, and Mike Airhart of Ex-Gay Watch, along with Justin Watt, received a cease and desist letter last week. Airhart said he removed the image as a “temporary precaution” after he received the letter and is seeking legal help. […]

Great parody! And parodies are allowed under copyright law. They’re trying to scare you and anybody else who doesn’t have the money to fight a lawsuit to protect free speech. But if this ever did go to court, you’d win under current copyright law. Good for you for hanging in!

bigolpoofter et al, as passionately as we may feel about the actions, mission, and marketing of Exodus the organization (hence my parody), I would be very grateful if we refrain from denigrating the members of that organization.

I believe they have as much right as anyone to explore their sexuality in a free and unintimidating environment. I’d like to keep it that way, for everyone.

Hi Justin. Just read about your parody billboard on the Gay and Lesbian Smartbrief, and reading Exodus’ C&D letter pissed me off to no end! I’m an entertainment lawyer and deal with intellectual property (and parody/fair use) issues almost everyday. I’m not a litigator, but I can be of some assistance with a response to these guys. If Lambda and/or ACLU is not interested, please contact me and I can try to help you out.

There seems to be very little of the original billboard here, so what’s the problem? These people are clearly mindless bigots and must be thwarted and stopped in their drive for their Straight Agenda and Special Rights at every opportunity.

I love the idea that you are standing up to these bigot lawyers representing Exodus. Find out what the real laws are and if you ‘re not breaking any, keep on doing it!! Don’t be intimidated. Good luck. Rick

Bravo! after years of getting my blood pressure up over something so not worth it, I really get to laugh out loud –Ben Franklin would be proud.
PS–it would make a great t-shirt in case you need to raise money for your defense fund

“I feel passionately about bringing attention to this issue,” Watt said. “My goal in creating the image, aside from the technical challenge it took to make it look like the real billboard, was to make people think about what the ‘ex-gay’ marketing message means.”

Hey Justin, I just found out about this mess from reading an article that was reposted over on crvboy.com in the forums. I have saved your image to my system and plan to place it on several of the websites I maintain. I would find it VERY funny if every (or at least as many as possible) GLBT person was to put it on their sites.

Coincidently, I find it a little disturbing that they have to defend their court history, it might have something to do with the fact they really don’t have a case since the work is more that 10% changed and therefore IS a parody of a disgustingly bigoted and offensive billboard and you did reference where the friggin’ billboard came from and who was responsible for that trash.

You don’t even need a fair use argument, I don’t think (I’m just a law student). Before something can be copyrighted, there must be authorship in the original work. There’s no authorship in the original billboard, just two words and a URL. No court would find this sufficient. As for the trademark argument, Exodus would need to demonstrate that it is likely the public would be confused by the ‘E’ logo. First of all, nobody knows what the hell the ‘E’ stands for. You’d have to be trying to pass the billboard off as belonging to Exodus before they could sue under the Lanham Act. Second of all, nobody can see it in the background of their billboard.

Exodus also has a weak claim, given that you could simply photograph one of their billboards and make the same modifications. Exodus has no Copyright or Trademark right to prevent the public from photographing these billboards, neither can it prevent people from parodying the ads once the public takes those photos.

hahaha, I love the “two changes” argument. Considering the fact that the billboard consists of two words and a url, two changes is already a very significant alteration. Also… where’s this letter E he’s talking about?

Took me forever to see the stupid “E” that they are talking about. It is in the background under the word “Straight” and to the left of “www”. You can not see it here but I could finally see at on a copy at
(http://www.jasongriffey.net/wp/2006/03/02/religious-litigious/). I would just “scrub that out in Photoshop. That way their stupid logo is gone and that part of their arguement will be crap. Other than that, this is very funny! Great Job!

Balls to them. Parody and political satire are entirely legitimate vehicles for comment which, by definition, always appropriate and tweak content, be it TV, radio, newspaper, photos or anything, really. You have support across the water to nail these bastards to the wall. I only wish I could do something more tangible, but hey – let’s not underestimate the power of prayer which, of course, these swine-herders constantly misappropriate for their twisted purposes.

In my blog archives I relate in a number of posts my experience of exorcism at the hands of born-again Christians. Yeah, exorcism. Horrible. I was young, foolish and trying to run away from being gay; oh, how I know better 19 years later. They did a lot of damage, for a time; I hate thinking how in the US they can legitimately advertise to hurt others as I was once hurt. Here in the UK we now have comprehensive anti-hate laws which mean, while there is an ex-gay movement, it is a tiny group of sad people – rather than a larger group of sad people – and they cannot hope to peddle their lies on the airwaves, in the press or on TV.

Let’s see whose side God is on if they do take you to court. It will certainly raise their profile as anti-democratic, homophobic nuts. I applaud you standing by your right to be witty and funny and spot-on in your spoofing. Long may we be saved from humourless bastards who think they can do all kinds of harm in the name of Christ. x

If they thought they had any sort of case they would sent your host a DMCA letter. They know your host would see through the shit, but assumed they could push you around with vague mutterances. If they thought they had a case, they would outline what it was based upon instead of boasting about their audiences before the court. They do not. They know it is fair use. For a work to be a parody if must borrow from what it parodies.

BTW, to hear more on my opinions about fascist Christian bull, feel free to listen to my podcast

Good for you. I preach (very liberal) on the air every Sunday morning, and I count how closely the Christians have been listening by how many ranting emails I get by Monday morning. The more emails, the better I’ve done. A cease-and-desist letter is the gold standard!

Draft to Exodus:
In determining whether the use of a copyrighted work is a fair use, there are four factors that are weighed by the court: 1) the purpose and nature of the use, including whether it is a parody of the copyrighted work; 2) the nature of the copyrighted work; 3) the amount of the copyrighted work used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole and; 4) the effect of the use upon the potential market of the copyrighted work. 17 U.S.C.A. § 107 (2005). When determining the purpose and nature of a new work, the court weighs four sub-factors: 1) whether the new work is transformative; 2) whether the new work can be reasonably perceived as commenting on the copyrighted work; 3) the commercial intent of the new work; and 4) the conduct of the defendant. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 569 (1994). As a national public interest law firm who has presented many briefs before the U.S. Supreme Court (by the way, how many of those cases did you win?) you will of course know that any self respecting court will likely find that the purpose and nature of the new work will militate towards fair use.

A court will likely deem that my new work is transformative of Exodus’ copyrighted work. A usage is transformative if it adds something new to the original work which changes the original work’s meaning or message, rather than simply superceding the original work. Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp., 137 F.3d 109, 114 (2d Cir. 1998).

The court will find that my work directly commented on Exodus’ copyrighted work. Parody is classified as comment or criticism and may claim fair use status. Campbell 510 U.S. at 569. In the context of a parody defense, the parodic character of the new work must be reasonably perceivable. Id. Parodic character is reasonably perceivable when it comments through ridicule directly on the substance or style of the original. Id.

etc etc. Have fun wasting Exodus’ money. I will win, you know it…idiots.

Thanks so much for the laugh, and I commend you for standing up for yourself from one of the most phoniest “organizations” (more like cults) in the USA. I speak from experience (New Life, not Exodus), and it’s the biggest joke on the planet. How silly of Exodus to try to bully you (and the gay community as well) around. I hope your story reaches every corner of the country, so people can see how silly these groups are. Funny, they shot their own selves in the foot by harassing you and getting this story out. Dumbasses!

THIS LAWYER IS A HACK! So I guess if you don’t make it as an ambulance chaser, you TRY to litigate for the American Taliban – logical legal transistion.
By his condescending tone, I bet he thought you were 12 years old and easily scared.
Make a copy and sign the letter then mail the original?? What can’t he afford a self-address stamp envelope and send you two copies? Or will such extravagant expenses blow a hole in his operating budget?
Did it come via certified or registered mail, probably not.
I’m sorry his writing skills are really atrocious, aside from his law books, he clearly has demonstrated he’s never cracked open a composition book either.
Should take it one step further and contact http://www.gay.com to ask them to put up similiar billboards in Orlando and have a great laugh reading the same letter!

gee. i didn’t know you could copyright a single letter of the alphabet. i thought that “e” thing looked familiar. maybe somebody should tell exodus about these guys
But I guess people have been sued over a single letter before

Anyway. GREAT parody. I just wish we lived in a world where this type of thing wasn’t necessary (both the paraody AND the suing).

If the anti-gay freaks can take a picture out of the newspaper of a gay couple being married and turn it into an anti-gay advertisement without permission (the court ruled that those anti-gay freaks COULD use the picture without their permission), then exodus is full of shit about being covered by copyright.

Justin. Laughs aside, it is the quacks at Exodus who are wrong here. I’ve often wondered what it would be like to throw the crap back at bigots with the word ‘gay’ exchanged for ‘straight.’ I mean, come on, who the hell do they think they are? Thanks for pointing out the stuidity of their argument. And a big pat on the back for the Fenwick and West attorney who involved him/herself in this case to the benefit of all of us! Onward dear Americans! And a big “Fuck You!” to the bigots, wherever you are. (I trust I can still say the ‘f’ word in America).

Justin, great job! I just linked to this from the Outright Libertarians blog and web site. We are the national LGBT association for Libertarian Party members and fellow travellers, and we’re behind you all the way on this.

There’s no way in hell this suit would go through. This is clearly not intellectual property violation or fraud. Fox couldn’t sue Al Franken, and they won’t be able to sue you. Good job making them squirm!

I LOVE this. You have NO idea how much I LOVE this. Those FREAKS trapped me when I was only 21 and had no idea about life because I had been raised by a bunch of religious NUTS. Their ‘reparative’ therapy really screwed me up. Any chance I get to see [Exodus] fall on their face is fabulous.

Hi Justin, I live in Orlando, and I see those hateful, nasty billboards everday! We complained to the local Gay and lesbian Center, and they were USELESS! Did not even try to get those billboards removed by the city council. SHAME on the GLBT Center in Orlando!! THANK YOU for taking the time to stand up to this EVIL hateful group..

This “culture war” that is being thrown around was basically started when a bunch of religious bigots had the bright idea to bitch about absolutely everything!

By the way, check out my blog. I’ve posted parodied images of several hate groups’ symbols, including Exodus’s fucking ‘e’, the AFA, NARTH, FRI, and “Love” won out.
I’m working on pictures of various fascists, such as James Dobson, Don Wildmon, Mathew Staver, Adolf Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, George Bush, Saddam Hussein, Rick Santorum, and so on.

In response to Brian (from Orlando)’s comment about the GLBT’s failure to REMOVE the “hateful, nasty billboards” — They probably didn’t even attempt it because they knew that Exodus hadn’t broken any laws. How could they have a billboard removed when it’s perfectly within Exodus’ rights to have such a billboard? Even if you disagree with their standpoint, they’re entitled to express their feelings (as protected by the very laws that Justin used to defend himself). No matter how much you dislike someone’s opinion, you can’t stifle it — or it would mean yours should be stifled, too. And I really, really doubt you would like that much, am I right?

Mandie, you’re definitely right that Exodus’s free speech deserves to be protected just as much as my own. Thus I have no intention of suing Exodus over their original billboards, even though I detest them.

But, there’s a big difference between sending an intimidating cease-and-desist letter containing misleading and inaccurate legal claims versus communicating directly with Exodus in order to convey that their billboard advertising is hurtful, stigmatizing, and offensive to straight people, let alone gay. And then requesting that they take down those billboards and cease to advertise in a way that that disparages homosexuals or homosexuality.

This scenario in no way infringes upon their free speech rights. What it does is provide them with some pretty powerful feedback that they are doing something wrong.

In Response to “Mandie” Unless you live in “Orlando” and must drive by those hateful billboards everday, you really have no reason to reply to my comments. It is NOT about free speech! Those billboards preach HATE and INTOLERANCE!! I bet if the billboard had a picture of you on it , your head would explode!!!

One need not be GBL to be offended by that Exodus advertisement. I’m terribly worried for anyone who believes that gay(/b/l) are necessarily un-happy, worried for people who believe that religion is the only or even a decent catalyst for happiness, and confused about the people who seem to feel that christianity is an ‘answer’ to homosexuality — as if the RC church wasn’t entirely okay with the idea 2,000 years ago.

And I am most confused by anyone who can look at such a sight and not be immediately offended. People can be straight without being narrow.

Thank you so very much for standing up and being a voice for the rest of us. I applaud you. Yes, free speech is, unfortunately, applicable to even the most closed-minded, hateful, facist, vile, filthy pieces of human garbage on the planet (that would most certainly include “Exodus”) who would rather jeer and make a spectacle of us than to just leave us the hell alone.

Thank God you got the ACLU involved — I just recently became a proud, card-carrying member of that organization. It’s good to have them on your side. I loathe and despise and yes, HATE, because that is my right, Exodus International and everything they stand for…because they exist for one reason alone — to foster and feed bigotry, hate and intolerance — and to condone these by other people in the name of “christianity.” I have a right to hate them the same way they have a right to “be heard.” But what makes me even more offended is that these billboards were allowed to go up to spread a message of hate. When will it end?

As a heterosexual female, I had little knowledge of the rhetoric and doctrine of transformational ministries such as Exodus. In fact, I came across your issue while researching a paper on reparative therapy for a doctorate course in psychology. I had no prior knowledge of the issues surrounding sexual reorientation therapy, or the underlying bias associated with such approaches (I am not a therapist). However, I have completed my review of thousands of pages of opinion written by legal scholars, mental health professionals, and opponents and proponents of this form of therapy, and am writing to say, I am APPAULED!

Although I am a heterosexual or “straight” female, I have not lived in a vacuum. My brother is is gay and I have encountered several acquaintances and made several friends through the years that were gay or lesbian. However, despite my relationships I was completely unaware of the challenges GLBT face from day-to-day. I cannot fathom that such outrageous and illegitimate biases such as those touted by these right-wing transformational ministries still exist – not in the 21st century?! However, based on my research, I was clearly uniformed and ashamed to admit my own previous ignorance.

My husband and I performed an independent exercise of our own this afternoon to explore these issues, and we used you idea to perform our little “experiment”. We entered a local Christian bookstore, and requested assistance with locating literature on sexual reorientation therapy. We were, of course, directed to an area of the store that contained volumes of material on the subject. The clerk was very concerned, and assumed one of our children must be the “afflicted” person – “poor thing”. I allowed her to continue with her recommendations (including possible referrals to transformational ministries), and sympathetic responses for a short time, and then simply asked whether she had any material relevant to my particular dilemma – I am straight but would like to learn of therapies that may allow me to explore being a lesbian. You can imagine her response!

In closing, I was very reassured by the ACLU’s March 22, 2006 response to Liberty Center. I would also like everyone that is involved to recognize that these transformational ministries are attempting to debase our civil rights – not just those associated with sexual orientation. If you were not required to read Orwell’s book Animal Farm as part of your school curricula perhaps you should do so before going to the polls next time! Also, please be more open and honest with your heterosexual friends, acquaintences, and family members about the prejudices you encounter – do not assume we know!

I think it’s weird that people think Jesus was straight: C’mon! He never married, he hung out with 12 other single guys, including one guy that He called “John The Beloved” – How gay is that? And don’t get me started on how they always want you to kneel in front of a sculpture of a naked man and then they want you to eat something that they say transforms into the “Body of Christ” in your mouth. Ahem. Yeah, that’s real straight! And why does the Pope live in that palace, with only men and all those antiques! while wearing fabulous dresses if he’s straight? Men who worship other men are by definition gay! Why are people so blinded by religion?